LAHORE: The Lahore High Court held that the power of attorney (vakalatnama) does not confer any power on the counsel impliedly to compromise or to make any statement to withdraw the suit or to get the suit decree, until and unless such powers have specifically been given to the attorney.

The court held that a court should apply maximum care and caution to ascertain that whether the parties are agreed to the statement of compromise given by their counsel.

The court observed there is hardly any doubt that if the power to do an act has not been specifically given to an attorney, such an act, whether compromise or otherwise, is of no legal consequence at the option of the concerned party. The court passed this order in a petition of Falek Sher who had not given any authority to the counsel to get the statement of compromise recorded and get the suit decreed.

The court said the related lower courts while dismissing the application of the petitioner have not applied their judicial mind and decided the matter on surmises and conjectures.

The court set aside the decision of the lower courts and directed the district and sessions judge to entrust the suit to the court of competent jurisdiction for its disposal in accordance with law.

Petitioners engaged Mirza Atta Ullah Qamar advocate to pursue their case. They never authorised him to make any statement of compromise or to get the suit decreed on the basis of compromise. Neither any authority through power of attorney (Vakalatnama) was given to him to make a compromise with the opposite party or to get the suit decreed on the basis of compromise. The petitioner pleaded that no compromise has been affected between the parties.

The court also noted that neither any authority was given to the counsel to make any statement of compromise nor permission was given to get the suit of the respondents decreed on the basis of compromise.

The court said both the lower courts dismissed the petitioners’ application on the ground that it is a settled principle of law that every lawyer engaged by a party has implied authority to enter into compromise even no specific power has been conferred upon him.

The court said the power of attorney must be construed strictly as giving only such authority as is conferred expressly or by necessary implication and it cannot empower beyond what it really conveys and its contents must be taken into consideration as a whole.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024